On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 7:19 AM, Dékány Dániel <[email protected]> wrote: > Woonsan Ko <[email protected]> írta: >>Hi Mark, >> >>Thanks a lot for the elaborated answers! >>Now I understand the use case and its goodness by having "spec" json >>file for each "generated source" with being able to use the shared >>FreeMarker "template". >> >>I'm just thinking aloud, but from user's perspective, I'm thinking of >>an example structure (package structure is up to users) like this: >> >>- [Template] >>src/main/freemarker/com/example/templates/generic-code-gen-template.ftl >>- [Spec] src/main/freemarker/com/example/Foo.spec.json >>- [Spec] src/main/freemarker/com/example/Bar.spec.json >> >>==> Generating Foo.java and Bar.java under the outputDirectory. > > I miss the ".java" from that. The original logic is that you remove the > ".json" from the end, and that's the output file name. Like you could have a > foo.xml.json, and now it generates foo.xml, not a java file.
I thought ".java" could be the default output extension to be appended after removing the suffix, ".spec.json", but your idea sounds better: Output file name followed by .json. > > So, I guess that the containing directory decides the purpose of the file is > find. > > That all this is inside /src/main/freemarker is more questionable though. > Similarly as docgen has /src/main/docgen (and that uses FreeMarker too BTW), > this should have some more specific name as well. It could be single directory, by default, for both .json and .ftl, with options to allow override the plugin configurations. e.g, <sourceDirectory>src/main/data</sourceDirectory>, <templateDirectory>src/main/freemarker</templateDirectory>. > > A more interesting question is if this plugin could support the other > approach as well, where you have one template per output file, and usually > one shared data-model. That's the logic that FMPP follows for example (with > some twist, like its XML file transformation feature works more like this > plugin). Of course, FMPP targets a different use case than this plugin, but > maybe it can do both without becoming messy. The use case with single shared data-model could be covered by an optional plugin configuration, as a global model. In that case the spec json file just points to the processing FreeMarker template. Or even the default FreeMarker template could be configured in the plugin configuration optionally. Then there could be only marker spec json file. Regards, Woonsan
